Hitler's intentions were for the good of Germany... he just had an unconventional idea of what that good would be. Your own source isn't exactly unbiased. The Neremberg trials were still the trials held by the victors of a war to record for history how rightous they were and how evil their opponent. Unnessicarily, really - the Nazis did that themselves. Still, there are only two possibilities: Either Hitler and the other party leaders were genuine Christian believers, albeit unconventional ones, or else they sought to use fake Christianity to advance politically... which would imply that a substantial part of their supporters were Christian, otherwise such a ploy would have been obviously pointless. Let us not forget that one of the very first things Hitler did upon coming to power was to set up a new government office for fighting what he considered the two most serious crimes of the time: Abortion and homosexuality. Sound uncomfortably familiar? It wasn't until later that he added ethnic exceptions to the abortion policy.
The Nazi state didn't oppose religion as such. It just silenced anyone who made trouble by speaking out against the state policies. Your own quote acknowledges this: "[They] pursued a program of persecution of priests,
clergy, and members of monastic orders whom they
deemed opposed to their purposes." It wasn't religion they oppressed, it was the churches as a potential rallying point of opposition.
That's nothing compared to what we did to Cromwell. After he died, we dug up the corpse and executed him anyway. Cromwell was not very popular by the time of his death.
Give him Stalin, but not Hitler. Hitler was a Christian himself, or at least claimed to be quite frequently and in strong terms. Being a politician it's not clear how much was an act for the voters and how much genuine belief. The Nazi party manifesto even declared the party stood for Christian belief.
Islam is worse than modern Christianity, yes... but try comparing it to Medieval Christianity, and it's a much closer contest. Christianity had to go through many reforms, often violently, to become what it is today.
Nothing at all, except that it defeats all the advantages of having an iPad. If you're going to limit it that much, might as well buy them a cheap $99 android tablet, or a kindle.
King Herod at that point was a little bit *dead*. Died 4BCE. There is no doubt that the dates are horribly wrong when the nativity story features a character who died four years before the story is supposed to be set.
You missed the joke. The modern Christmas is so dominated by the listed elements, it would be quite possible for someone to celebrate Christmas for many years without even realising there is a religious element.
Be fair... there have been previous Wars on Christmas. Puritans banned it for a time in England, considering the holiday two full of Catholic and Pagan influences and having objections to celebrating the solumn occasion of Christ's birth with drunkenness and partying. Then Puritans banned it again in the New World later on, for exactly the same reasons. Some Islamic countries continue to ban it, fearing that celebrating even the secular elements of Christmas could open their culture up to Christian influences. There have been plenty of Wars on Christmas... usually by Christians.
Just wait for the first student to get caught by their parents looking at porn on their school-suplied iPad. Those things will be locked down so tight after that, Apple could only dream of that kind of control. Probably have web browsing disabled entirely, along with all apps except the book reader, and that set to only open approved school-distributed texts.
I work at a public school. Last week a student got frustrated with his work and punched a laptop so hard the screen fractured. This isn't that uncommon an occurance. Equipment lifespan depends on the students.
It used to be that noone would get fired for buying IBM. Then it was Microsoft. When it comes to tablets, Apple is still the leader by market share. They are the low-risk option. Sure, you pay more. A lot more. But if it all goes horribly wrong, you can't be accused of causing the problem by buying inferior equipment.
Except in Europe. We have some quite strict recycling laws that give the manufacturer part responsibility for end-of-lifeing old equipment. Not that they'll care at all if you just throw it in the skip.
Sounds like the powers-of-two system. It allows you to shift the odds to where you will almost certainly make a small amount of money... but run a small risk of losing a huge amount. The mean return is still the same as random betting, but the distribution can be to the advantage of some gamblers.
If there really were a system that allowed for consistantly making a profit, you can be sure it'd work for about a week before the casinos found a countermeasure. Otherwise they'd be broke: News would spread very quickly, and soon professional gamblers would drive them to ruin.
So the contract would define produce as including singing.
I recall reading somewhere that such things are common clauses in contracts signed by new, as-yet-unknown artists. Studios worry that without such a clause, an artist who achieves success may be poached away by a rival studio offering better conditions or higher royalties.
2^32 - 2^24 - 2^16 - 2^20 - 2^16 - 2^28 = 4008574976. That's if you put them all on one giant flat network from hell, and so didn't use any for network or broadcast addresses.
Yes, 2^16 in there twice - don't forget APIPA. The 2^28 is reserved for multicast.
It is. For a start, the centrifuges aren't full of uranium. They are full of uranium hexafluoride, a gas. No possibility of it going critical. The worst case scenario would be that containment is ruptured and the gas escapes - it's nasty stuff, about a ten on the flesh-melt-o-meter, and will quite happily burn though walls and boil the skin off of anyone who gets in it's way. If that happens it'll kill a few workers and completly destroy the centrifuge, but that's all. No boom.
I'd almost trust Iran with the bomb right now - the current regime seems to know well enough that you don't initiate MAD, or else they'd have done so with conventional military already. But governments change, espicially in dictatorships like Iran - it only takes one fanatic who believes Allah will grant victory and that bomb is in the next shipping container addressed to New York. Don't even need an ICBM.
Ignoring your x/h confusion, h264 both encoding and decoding works very well on mobile devices. The key is hardware acceleration. It takes great amounts of processor time on a plain old general-purpose processor to handle video (My old C2D struggled on 1080p h264), but if you have purpose-built silicon to handle the hard parts like motion estimation/compensation than it becomes quite practical even for mobiles. The downside is that you can't add new codecs using a simple software plugin.
You are right, IE and Safari both support h264 but not WebM. I wonder why that would be?
Oh, yes. Microsoft and Apple are both MPEG-LA members, and stand to profit substantially from the success of h264. Whereas WebM is the product of one of their rivals.
I can't see either of those browsers getting WebM support any time soon - and those browers which can support WebM are excluded from h264 by patent and licencing concerns. We're back in the bad old days of Netscape vs IE, where web designers had to write seperate pages for the two semi-compatible browsers and return one based on user-agent.
Slashdot Mirror
Hitler's intentions were for the good of Germany... he just had an unconventional idea of what that good would be. Your own source isn't exactly unbiased. The Neremberg trials were still the trials held by the victors of a war to record for history how rightous they were and how evil their opponent. Unnessicarily, really - the Nazis did that themselves. Still, there are only two possibilities: Either Hitler and the other party leaders were genuine Christian believers, albeit unconventional ones, or else they sought to use fake Christianity to advance politically... which would imply that a substantial part of their supporters were Christian, otherwise such a ploy would have been obviously pointless. Let us not forget that one of the very first things Hitler did upon coming to power was to set up a new government office for fighting what he considered the two most serious crimes of the time: Abortion and homosexuality. Sound uncomfortably familiar? It wasn't until later that he added ethnic exceptions to the abortion policy.
The Nazi state didn't oppose religion as such. It just silenced anyone who made trouble by speaking out against the state policies. Your own quote acknowledges this: "[They] pursued a program of persecution of priests, clergy, and members of monastic orders whom they deemed opposed to their purposes." It wasn't religion they oppressed, it was the churches as a potential rallying point of opposition.
That's nothing compared to what we did to Cromwell. After he died, we dug up the corpse and executed him anyway. Cromwell was not very popular by the time of his death.
Give him Stalin, but not Hitler. Hitler was a Christian himself, or at least claimed to be quite frequently and in strong terms. Being a politician it's not clear how much was an act for the voters and how much genuine belief. The Nazi party manifesto even declared the party stood for Christian belief.
Islam is worse than modern Christianity, yes... but try comparing it to Medieval Christianity, and it's a much closer contest. Christianity had to go through many reforms, often violently, to become what it is today.
Nothing at all, except that it defeats all the advantages of having an iPad. If you're going to limit it that much, might as well buy them a cheap $99 android tablet, or a kindle.
King Herod at that point was a little bit *dead*. Died 4BCE. There is no doubt that the dates are horribly wrong when the nativity story features a character who died four years before the story is supposed to be set.
You missed the joke. The modern Christmas is so dominated by the listed elements, it would be quite possible for someone to celebrate Christmas for many years without even realising there is a religious element.
I thought it was about booze, presents, parties, shopping and kitchy pictures of snowmen and santa?
Be fair... there have been previous Wars on Christmas. Puritans banned it for a time in England, considering the holiday two full of Catholic and Pagan influences and having objections to celebrating the solumn occasion of Christ's birth with drunkenness and partying. Then Puritans banned it again in the New World later on, for exactly the same reasons. Some Islamic countries continue to ban it, fearing that celebrating even the secular elements of Christmas could open their culture up to Christian influences. There have been plenty of Wars on Christmas... usually by Christians.
Just wait for the first student to get caught by their parents looking at porn on their school-suplied iPad. Those things will be locked down so tight after that, Apple could only dream of that kind of control. Probably have web browsing disabled entirely, along with all apps except the book reader, and that set to only open approved school-distributed texts.
I work at a public school. Last week a student got frustrated with his work and punched a laptop so hard the screen fractured. This isn't that uncommon an occurance. Equipment lifespan depends on the students.
It used to be that noone would get fired for buying IBM. Then it was Microsoft. When it comes to tablets, Apple is still the leader by market share. They are the low-risk option. Sure, you pay more. A lot more. But if it all goes horribly wrong, you can't be accused of causing the problem by buying inferior equipment.
Except in Europe. We have some quite strict recycling laws that give the manufacturer part responsibility for end-of-lifeing old equipment. Not that they'll care at all if you just throw it in the skip.
Third film.
Neo is Jesus.
Complete with crucifxion-pose sacrificial death..
Along with drunken brawling.
Sounds like the powers-of-two system. It allows you to shift the odds to where you will almost certainly make a small amount of money... but run a small risk of losing a huge amount. The mean return is still the same as random betting, but the distribution can be to the advantage of some gamblers.
If there really were a system that allowed for consistantly making a profit, you can be sure it'd work for about a week before the casinos found a countermeasure. Otherwise they'd be broke: News would spread very quickly, and soon professional gamblers would drive them to ruin.
So the contract would define produce as including singing.
I recall reading somewhere that such things are common clauses in contracts signed by new, as-yet-unknown artists. Studios worry that without such a clause, an artist who achieves success may be poached away by a rival studio offering better conditions or higher royalties.
2^32 - 2^24 - 2^16 - 2^20 - 2^16 - 2^28 = 4008574976. That's if you put them all on one giant flat network from hell, and so didn't use any for network or broadcast addresses. Yes, 2^16 in there twice - don't forget APIPA. The 2^28 is reserved for multicast.
It is. For a start, the centrifuges aren't full of uranium. They are full of uranium hexafluoride, a gas. No possibility of it going critical. The worst case scenario would be that containment is ruptured and the gas escapes - it's nasty stuff, about a ten on the flesh-melt-o-meter, and will quite happily burn though walls and boil the skin off of anyone who gets in it's way. If that happens it'll kill a few workers and completly destroy the centrifuge, but that's all. No boom.
I'd almost trust Iran with the bomb right now - the current regime seems to know well enough that you don't initiate MAD, or else they'd have done so with conventional military already. But governments change, espicially in dictatorships like Iran - it only takes one fanatic who believes Allah will grant victory and that bomb is in the next shipping container addressed to New York. Don't even need an ICBM.
Once again, proof that crime *does* pay. Just make sure you die before you are caught.
Depends on Gaga's contract. It might contain the 'I grant ownership of copyright for everything I produce for the next x years to UMG' clause.
Ignoring your x/h confusion, h264 both encoding and decoding works very well on mobile devices. The key is hardware acceleration. It takes great amounts of processor time on a plain old general-purpose processor to handle video (My old C2D struggled on 1080p h264), but if you have purpose-built silicon to handle the hard parts like motion estimation/compensation than it becomes quite practical even for mobiles. The downside is that you can't add new codecs using a simple software plugin.
You are right, IE and Safari both support h264 but not WebM. I wonder why that would be?
Oh, yes. Microsoft and Apple are both MPEG-LA members, and stand to profit substantially from the success of h264. Whereas WebM is the product of one of their rivals.
I can't see either of those browsers getting WebM support any time soon - and those browers which can support WebM are excluded from h264 by patent and licencing concerns. We're back in the bad old days of Netscape vs IE, where web designers had to write seperate pages for the two semi-compatible browsers and return one based on user-agent.